[OSM-legal-talk] Progressing OSM to a new data Licence regime

[Rob Myers]

MJ Ray wrote:
> rob at robmyers.org wrote: [...]

> If you think it's a bad idea for another reason, then fine, but "room
> for mischief" applies to almost all licences.  Ultimately, whether
> work is Free and Open with a capital F O is how it's actually handled
> in practice.

By "room for mischief" I mean "the ability to hand people restricted 
work in practice". I mentioned the burden on redistributors as well. 
Work may be Free Upstream, but it's important that it is Free On Actual 
Delivery as well.

> As long as Parallel Distribution as specified will stand up as a
> requirement if challenged, that's not a problem in itself IMO - it
> seems a good way to make DRM copies more expensive and more cumbersome
> and so discourage it.

It actually makes transparent (sic) copies more expensive and more 
cumbersome from the point of view of the DRM-enamoured. Having the 
simple requirement that work be unencumbered sidesteps all this.

- Rob.